Related
Translate
Get RNB via RSS
 |
RNB's RSS feed What is this? |
Get RNB via Email
 |
 Subscribe by Email What is this? |
Follow: Twitter
Most Popular
This Week:
- Guyana’s Jonestown suicide site gets plaque
- Gaddafi preaches Islam to Rome beauties
- Scientology practices ‘putting people at risk’
- Recession: Muslim schools in UK under threat of closure
- Australian senator tells Parliament of widespread criminal conduct within the Church of Scientology
- When a child dies, faith is no defense
- Muslim terrorists smuggle fatwas promoting Jihad out of secure UK prisons
- Techie Holy water and geeky bishops
- Israel Charges Extremist With Attempted Murder Of Messianic Family
- 1-year prison term for man who participated in cyber attack on Church of Scientology Web sites
The wild, wild web
June 18, 2006
Edward Fadely, retired associate justice of the Oregon Supreme Court
www.oregonlive.com
More articles on this topic: Rick RossToday’s blogosphere is a veritable Wild West of verbal ambushes and shootouts, with very little fear of legal recourse to keep character assassination, defamation and dirty business tricks in check.
It’s an area of the law that desperately needs serious attention. Self-proclaimed “experts” and “journalists” abound on the Internet. “Web logs are the prized platform of an online lynch mob spouting liberty, but spewing lies, libel and invective,” wrote Daniel Lyons in “Forbes.” Some 50 percent to 60 percent of blog attacks are now sponsored by business rivals, said a lawyer quoted in the story.
Ten years ago Congress passed a law requiring blog operators to protect the public by self-regulation. But many flout that responsibility and knowingly post inaccurate messages that damage others.
That law has stifled the courts’ rights to recover damages for unauthorized, negligent or dishonest use of Internet sites, including blogs. The guarantee that a person injured may use the courts to recover has existed in our culture since the century of the Magna Carta, more than 700 years ago.
But free-speech guarantees haven’t previously protected libel, defamation or spoken-but-fraudulent activity. As the strong free-speech guarantee in the Oregon Constitution also provides: “. . . but every person shall be responsible for the abuse of this right.”
These legal holes exist while the cyber Wild West keeps getting bigger. There were about 10,000 Web sites in 1994, according to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s “Technology Review.” By 2000 that number soared to more than 25 million, and sites continue to grow exponentially.
Sometimes it’s impossible to find sources for damaging language published on the Internet. An example is Apple vs. Doe where, in December 2004, Apple filed a lawsuit against unnamed individuals who allegedly leaked information about a rumored new Apple product to several online news sites.
The courts must walk a fine line between a federal statute interpreted as creating immunity and the responsibility for the harm caused by libel.
Unfortunately, many innocent companies are being damaged by individuals out for profit or self-promotion. Even in instances where legitimate organizations have been seriously damaged by bloggers, it’s difficult to counter unfounded attacks or to demand the actual sources, let alone seek the protections of the law.
The impact on innocent parties can be severe — some companies have lost millions in stock value from an irate individual speaking anonymously as an expert on a blog soapbox, making statements intended to be read as fact.
Instead, they’re nothing more than the venom generated by a personal and unjustified grievance. Even when those statements are later corrected or balanced, misperceptions are hard to change.
And the courts aren’t helping matters. For example, Landmark Education, an international training and development company, dropped its lawsuit in New Jersey against Rick Ross, a self-professed “cult expert” who has built a career and reputation by quoting people’s opinions on his Web site.
Landmark Education terminated its lawsuit when, in an unrelated case, a New Jersey court significantly limited the kind of Internet behavior it would consider damages for. Court decisions like that make it even more difficult for companies to protect themselves against misinformation and false accusations.
Ross, who claims he’s an expert on cults, religions and any organization he deems potentially harmful, should be held to a higher standard — not a lesser one. Rick Ross is a convicted felon with no degree of any kind. He says so on his own Web site.
His lack of professional qualifications doesn’t stop Ross from freely labeling credible organizations in the personal development area “worthless” and “faked.” Ross also attacks John Gray, author of “Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus,” the Mormon Church and the practice of yoga.
Whether or not you endorse Gray or yoga, the law should protect their rights and demand journalistic standards and accountability.
It’s high time to fill the gap in a system that allows defamation in the blogosphere to go unchecked. The harm can be wide-ranging and devastating. Until the law catches up with technology, innocent parties have little or no protection in the volatile world of cyberspace.
Judge Edward Fadeley is a retired associate justice of the Oregon Supreme Court. He lives on a farm in the Willamette Valley.
What You Can Do From Here
|
Read More Articles On These Topics
 Share, Blog About, Bookmark, or Email This Article
Subscribe
Read Another Article
 Previous entry: TM Survey? Next entry: Dr. Billy Graham: Cults keep people from God
RNB Homepage with latest headlinesFind Related Information
Find Related Books
|
Share This Article
To share this page simply copy and paste one of these URL's:
